One document matched: draft-ietf-weirds-object-inventory-01.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY RFC2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC2622 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2622.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC3912 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3912.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5730 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5730.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5731 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5731.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5732 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5732.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5733 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5733.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5890 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5890.xml">
<!ENTITY I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response PUBLIC ''
'http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response.xml'>
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc strict="yes"?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="info" docName="draft-ietf-weirds-object-inventory-01" ipr="pre5378Trust200902">
<!-- category values: std, bcp, info, exp, and historic -->
<front>
<title abbrev="Registration Data Object Inventory">
Registration Data Access Protocol Object Inventory Analysis
</title>
<author fullname="Linlin Zhou" initials="L" surname="Zhou">
<organization>CNNIC</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District</street>
<city>Beijing</city>
<region>Beijing</region>
<code>100190</code>
<country>China</country>
</postal>
<phone>+86 10 5881 2677</phone>
<email>zhoulinlin@cnnic.cn</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Ning Kong" initials="N" surname="Kong">
<organization>CNNIC</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District</street>
<city>Beijing</city>
<region>Beijing</region>
<code>100190</code>
<country>China</country>
</postal>
<phone>+86 10 5881 3147</phone>
<email>nkong@cnnic.cn</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Sean Shen" initials="S" surname="Shen">
<organization>CNNIC</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District</street>
<city>Beijing</city>
<region>Beijing</region>
<code>100190</code>
<country>China</country>
</postal>
<phone>+86 10 5881 3038</phone>
<email>shenshuo@cnnic.cn</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Steve Sheng" initials="S" surname="Sheng">
<organization>ICANN</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330</street>
<city>Marina del Rey</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>90292</code>
<country>United States of America</country>
</postal>
<phone>+1.310.823.9358</phone>
<email>steve.sheng@icann.org</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Arturo Servin" initials="A" surname="Servin">
<organization>LACNIC</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Rambla Mexico 6125</street>
<city>Montevideo</city>
<region>Montevideo</region>
<code>11400</code>
<country>Uruguay</country>
</postal>
<phone>+598-2604-2222</phone>
<email>aservin@lacnic.net</email>
</address>
</author>
<date month="Oct" year="2013" />
<area>Internet</area>
<workgroup>Internet Engineering Task Force</workgroup>
<keyword>whois restful weirds response object inventory</keyword>
<abstract>
<t>
WHOIS output objects from registries (including both Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) and Domain Name
Registries (DNRs)) were collected and analyzed. This document describes the statistical
analysis process and result of existing WHOIS information. The purpose of this document is to build an object
inventory to facilitate discussions of data objects included in Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP) responses.
</t>
</abstract>
</front>
<middle>
<section title="Introduction">
<t>
RIRs and DNRs have historically maintained a lookup service to permit public access to some portion of the
registry database. Most registries offer the service via the WHOIS protocol <xref target="RFC3912"></xref>,
with additional services being offered via world wide web pages, bulk downloads, and other services, such as
RPSL <xref target="RFC2622"></xref>.
</t>
<t>
Although the WHOIS protocol specified in <xref target="RFC3912"></xref> is widely adopted and supported, it has
several shortcomings that limits its usefulness to the evolving needs of the Internet community. For example, the
WHOIS protocol has not been Internationalized, it does not consistently support Internationalized Domain Name (IDN,
described in <xref target="RFC5890"></xref>); WHOIS has no query and response format; and WHOIS protocol does not support
user authentication, access control for differentiated access.
</t>
<t>
This document is aimed to build an object inventory to facilitate discussions of registration data objects. Based
on this statistics result, it may help to form and specify the RDAP response format.
</t>
<t>
In number space, there are altogether 5 RIRs. All RIRs provide information about IP addresses, Autonomous System Number (ASNs)
and contacts, the data model used is different for each RIR. In domain name space, there are now over 200 ccTLDs and 21 gTLDs.
Different domain name registries may have different WHOIS response objects and formats. A common understanding of all these
data formats is critical.
</t>
<t>
This document describes the WHOIS data collection procedures and gives a data object inventory analysis based on
the collected data from 5 RIRs and 106 ccTLDs and 18 gTLDs from DNRs. The RIR data objects are classified into IP address, ASN,
person or contact and the organization that held the resource. The DNR data objects are classified into domain,
contact, nameserver and registrar related objects. Other objects that do not belong to above categories are viewed
as private designed objects. In this document, we are not intended to analyze all the query and response types existed in RIRs and DNRs.
The most common query objects will be discussed, other objects such as RPSL data structure used by Internet Routing Registries (IRRs)
will be added at a later time if the community feels it is necessary.
</t>
<t>
Since this is a document with statistics analysis and there are no protocol specifications, the
<xref target="RFC2119"></xref> language does not apply.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Terminology">
<t>
<list style="symbols">
<t>
Data element -- The name of specific response object.
</t>
<t>
Label -- Different registries may have different naming ways for the same data element. So there may be several labels with the
same meaning and belong to one group of data element.
</t>
<t>
Most popular label -- The label which is most supported by the registries.
</t>
<t>
Number of labels -- The number of different labels.
</t>
<t>
Total count -- The number of registries that support a certain data element.
</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
<section title="Methodology">
<t>
WHOIS information, including port 43 response and web response data, is collected following the procedures described below.
</t>
<t>
RIR objects collection process:
</t>
<t>
<list style="format (%d)">
<t>
The process of RIR data collection is relatively easy. There are altogether 5 RIRs which are AFRINIC, APNIC,
ARIN, LACNIC and RIPE NCC. All the RIRs provide information of IPs, ASNs and contacts. Find the 5 RIR WHOIS servers firstly.
</t>
<t>
Query the corresponding IPs, ASNs, contacts and organizations registered in 5 RIRs and make a comparative analysis of the responses data.
</t>
<t>
Data elements with the same meaning, but using different labels, are grouped together.
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
DNR objects collections process:
</t>
<t>
<list style="format (%d)">
<t>
A programming script is applied to collect port 43 response data from 294 ccTLDs. "nic.ccTLD" is used as the query string which is
usually registered in a domain registry. Responses of 106 ccTLDs were received. 18 gTLDs' port 43 response data is collected from
their contracts with ICANN. So the sample size of port 43 WHOIS response data is 124 registries in total.
</t>
<t>
WHOIS data from web is collected manually from the 124 registries that have port 43 WHOIS responses.
</t>
<t>
Some of the responses which are collected by program may not seem to be correct. So data of top 10 ccTLD registries, like .de, .eu
and .uk etc., was re-verified by querying domain names other than "nic.ccTLD".
</t>
<t>
In accordance with the specification 4 of new gTLD applicant guide book, <xref target="RFC5730"></xref>,
<xref target="RFC5731"></xref>, <xref target="RFC5732"></xref> and <xref target="RFC5733"></xref>, the response data
objects are classified into public and other data objects. Public data objects are those which are defined in the above
two documents. Other objects are those which are self designed data elements or objects in different registries.
</t>
<t>
Data elements with the same meaning, but using different labels, are grouped together. The numbers of registries that support
the data elements is calculated in the total count column.
</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
<section title="RIR Objects Analysis">
<section title="WHOIS Data of Organizations Holding a Resource">
<t>
The following table shows the organization objects of 5 RIRs.
</t>
<texttable title="WHOIS Data of Organizations Holding a Resource">
<ttcol align='center'>RIR Objects</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>AFRINIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>APNIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>ARIN</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>LACNIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>RIPE NCC</ttcol>
<c>Organization name</c>
<c>Organisation</c>
<c>role</c>
<c>Name</c>
<c>Owner</c>
<c>org-name</c>
<c>Organization ID</c>
<c>org-name</c>
<c>nic-hdl</c>
<c>Handle</c>
<c>owner-id</c>
<c>organisation</c>
<c>Company</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Company</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Name of person responsible</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>responsible</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Type of organization</c>
<c>org-type</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>org-type</c>
<c>Country</c>
<c>country</c>
<c>country</c>
<c>country</c>
<c>country</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Postal Address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>City</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>city</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>State</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>StateProv</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Postal Code</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>PostalCode</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>Fax Number</c>
<c>fax-no</c>
<c>fax-no</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>fax-no</c>
<c>ID of administrative contact</c>
<c>admin-c</c>
<c>admin-c</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>owner-c</c>
<c>admin-c (multiple)</c>
<c>ID of technical contact</c>
<c>tech-c</c>
<c>tech-c</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>tech-c</c>
<c>tech-c (multiple)</c>
<c>Reference of maintainer</c>
<c>mnt-ref</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>mnt-ref</c>
<c>Reference of maintainer</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>Remarks</c>
<c>remarks</c>
<c>remarks</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>remarks</c>
<c>Date of record creation</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>RegDate</c>
<c>created</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Date of record changed</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>changed (multiple)</c>
<c>Updated</c>
<c>changed</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>List of resources</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>list of resources</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Source</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>Reference</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Ref</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
</texttable>
</section>
<section title="WHOIS Data of Contact">
<t>
The following table shows the contact objects of 5 RIRs.
</t>
<texttable title="WHOIS Data of Contact">
<ttcol align='center'>RIR Objects</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>AFRINIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>APNIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>ARIN</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>LACNIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>RIPE NCC</ttcol>
<c>Name</c>
<c>person</c>
<c>person</c>
<c>Name</c>
<c>person</c>
<c>person</c>
<c>Company</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Company</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Postal Address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>Address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>address</c>
<c>City</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>City</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>State</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>StateProv</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Postal Code</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>PostalCode</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Country</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>country</c>
<c>Country</c>
<c>country</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>Phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>phone</c>
<c>Fax Number</c>
<c>fax-no</c>
<c>fax-no</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>fax-no</c>
<c>Email</c>
<c>e-mail</c>
<c>e-mail</c>
<c>Email</c>
<c>e-mail</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>ID</c>
<c>nic-hdl</c>
<c>nic-hdl</c>
<c>Handle</c>
<c>nic-hdl</c>
<c>nic-hdl</c>
<c>Remarks</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>remarks</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>remarks</c>
<c>Notify</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>notify</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>ID of maintainer</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>Registration Date</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>RegDate</c>
<c>created</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Registration update</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>changed</c>
<c>Updated</c>
<c>changed</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Source</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>Reference</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Ref</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
</texttable>
</section>
<section title="WHOIS Data of IP">
<t>
The following table shows the IP address objects of 5 RIRs.
</t>
<texttable title="WHOIS Data of IP">
<ttcol align='center'>RIR Objects</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>AFRINIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>APNIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>ARIN</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>LACNIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>RIPE NCC</ttcol>
<c>IP address range</c>
<c>inetnum</c>
<c>inetnum</c>
<c>NetRange</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>inetnum</c>
<c>IPV6 address range</c>
<c>inet6num/inetnum</c>
<c>inet6num/inetnum</c>
<c>CIDR</c>
<c>inetnum</c>
<c>inet6num/inetnum</c>
<c>Description</c>
<c>descr</c>
<c>descr</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>descr</c>
<c>Remarks</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>remarks</c>
<c>Origin AS</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>origin (on route/6)</c>
<c>OriginAS</c>
<c>OriginAS (future)</c>
<c>origin (on route/6)</c>
<c>Network name/ID</c>
<c>netname</c>
<c>netname</c>
<c>NetName NetHandle</c>
<c>inetrev</c>
<c>netname</c>
<c>Maintainer</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>mnt-irt</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Maintainer</c>
<c>mnt-ref</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Administrative contact</c>
<c>admin-c</c>
<c>admin-c</c>
<c>OrgId</c>
<c>ownerid</c>
<c>admin-c</c>
<c>Parent range</c>
<c>parent</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Parent</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Status</c>
<c>status</c>
<c>status</c>
<c>NetType</c>
<c>status</c>
<c>status</c>
<c>Registration Date</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>RegDate</c>
<c>created</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Registration update</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>changed (multiple)</c>
<c>Updated</c>
<c>changed</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Reference</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Ref</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>ID organization holding the resource</c>
<c>org</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>OrgId</c>
<c>owner</c>
<c>organisation</c>
<c>Referral server</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>ReferralServer</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Technical contact</c>
<c>tech-c</c>
<c>tech-c</c>
<c>OrgTechHandle</c>
<c>tech-c</c>
<c>tech-c (multiple)</c>
<c>Abuse contact</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>OrgAbuseHandle</c>
<c>abuse-c</c>
<c>abuse-mailbox</c>
<c>Referral technical contact</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>RTechHandle</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Referral abuse contact</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>RAbuseHandle</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Referral NOC contact</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>RNOCHandle</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Name server</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>nserver</c>
<c>NA</c>
</texttable>
</section>
<section title="WHOIS Data of ASN">
<texttable title="WHOIS Data of ASN">
<ttcol align='center'>RIR Objects</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>AFRINIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>APNIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>ARIN</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>LACNIC</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>RIPE NCC</ttcol>
<c>Description</c>
<c>descr</c>
<c>descr</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>descr</c>
<c>Organization</c>
<c>organisation</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>OrgId</c>
<c>owner</c>
<c>org</c>
<c>Comment</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Comment</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>remarks</c>
<c>Administrative contact ID</c>
<c>admin-c</c>
<c>admin-c</c>
<c>ASHandle</c>
<c>owner-id</c>
<c>admin-c</c>
<c>Technical contact ID</c>
<c>tech-c</c>
<c>tech-c</c>
<c>OrgTechHandle</c>
<c>routing-c</c>
<c>tech-c (multiple)</c>
<c>Organization ID</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>nic-hdl</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>owner-c</c>
<c>organisation</c>
<c>Notify</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>notify</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Abuse contact</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>OrgAbuseHandle</c>
<c>abuse-c</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Maintainer</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>mnt-by</c>
<c>Maintainer</c>
<c>mnt-lower</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>mnt-lower</c>
<c>Maintainer</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>mnt-ref</c>
<c>Registration Date</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>RegDate</c>
<c>created</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Registration update</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>changed (multiple)</c>
<c>Updated</c>
<c>changed</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>Source</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>NA</c>
<c>source</c>
</texttable>
</section>
<section title="Conclusion">
<t>
As it can be observed, for each object (Organization, Contact Person, Net-num and ASN) there are fields
that are unique to only one or a set of RIRs and there are fields that have the same meaning but are
referred different for each RIR. In order to construct a single data model for each object a selection of
the most common and useful fields was made. That initial selection was the starting point of the previous
document of <xref target="I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response"/>.
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="DNR Objects Analysis">
<section title="Overview">
<t>
WHOIS data is collected from 124 registries, including 106 ccTLDs and 18 gTLDs. All the 124 registries support domain query.
Among 124 registries, 8 ccTLDs and 15 gTLDs support contact query. 10 ccTLDs and 18 gTLDs support name server query.
4 ccTLDs and 18 gTLDs support registrar query. Domain WHOIS data contains 68 data elements that use a total of 550 labels.
There are total 392 other objects for Domain WHOIS data. The raw data can be accessed with the following link:
<xref target="Stat-Data-File">WHOIS Statistics Data File</xref>
</t>
</section>
<section title="Public Objects">
<t>
As mentioned above, public objects are those data elements selected according to new gTLD application guide book,
<xref target="RFC5730"></xref>, <xref target="RFC5731"></xref>, <xref target="RFC5732"></xref> and <xref target="RFC5733"></xref>.
They are generally classified into four categories: domain, contact, nameserver and registrar related information.
</t>
<section title="WHOIS Data of Domain">
<t>
WHOIS data of domain includes "Domain Name", "Creation Date", "Domain Status", "Expiration Date", "Updated Date", "Domain ID",
"DNSSEC" and "Last Transferred Date". The following table gives the element name, most popular label and corresponding numbers
of TLDs and labels.
</t>
<texttable title="WHOIS Data of Domain">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>Most Popular Label</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of Labels</ttcol>
<c>Domain Name</c>
<c>Domain Name</c>
<c>118</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>Creation Date</c>
<c>Created</c>
<c>106</c>
<c>24</c>
<c>Domain Status</c>
<c>Status</c>
<c>95</c>
<c>8</c>
<c>Expiration Date</c>
<c>Expiration Date</c>
<c>81</c>
<c>21</c>
<c>Updated Date</c>
<c>Modified</c>
<c>70</c>
<c>20</c>
<c>Domain ID</c>
<c>Domain ID</c>
<c>34</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>DNSSEC</c>
<c>DNSSEC</c>
<c>14</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Last Transferred Date</c>
<c>Last Transferred Date</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>3</c>
</texttable>
<t>
Analyzing the above data, about 95.16% of the 124 registries support "Domain Name" data element; 85.48% of the 124 registries
support "Creation Date" data element; 76.61% of the 124 registries support "Domain Status" data element. On the other hand, some
elements such as "DNSSEC" and "Last Transferred Date" are only supported by 11.29% and 3.23% of all the registries seperately.
</t>
</section>
<section title="WHOIS Data of Contact">
<t>
In domain name space, contacts are typically divided into registrant, administrative contact, technical contact and billing
contact.
</t>
<section title="Registrant">
<t>
The following table shows all the contact information of registrant. 14 data elements are listed below.
</t>
<texttable title="Registrant">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>Most Popular Label</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of Labels</ttcol>
<c>Registrant Name</c>
<c>Name</c>
<c>65</c>
<c>7</c>
<c>Registrant Email</c>
<c>Registrant Email</c>
<c>59</c>
<c>7</c>
<c>Registrant ID</c>
<c>Registrant ID</c>
<c>50</c>
<c>12</c>
<c>Registrant Phone</c>
<c>Registrant Phone</c>
<c>48</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>Registrant Fax</c>
<c>Registrant Fax</c>
<c>44</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>Registrant Organization</c>
<c>Registrant Organization</c>
<c>42</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Registrant Country Code</c>
<c>Country</c>
<c>42</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>Registrant City</c>
<c>Registrant City</c>
<c>38</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Registrant Postal Code</c>
<c>Registrant Postal Code</c>
<c>37</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>Registrant State/Province</c>
<c>Registrant State/Province</c>
<c>32</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Registrant Street</c>
<c>Registrant Street1</c>
<c>31</c>
<c>16</c>
<c>Registrant Country</c>
<c>Registrant Country</c>
<c>19</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Registrant Phone Ext.</c>
<c>Registrant Phone Ext.</c>
<c>18</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>Registrant Fax Ext</c>
<c>Registrant Fax Ext</c>
<c>17</c>
<c>2</c>
</texttable>
<t>
Among all the data elements, "Registrant Name", "Registrant Email" and "Registrant ID" are the top 3 data elements.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Admin Contact">
<t>
The following table shows all the contact information of administrative contact. 14 data elements are listed below.
</t>
<texttable title="Admin Contact">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>Most Popular Label</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of Labels</ttcol>
<c>Admin Street</c>
<c>Address</c>
<c>64</c>
<c>19</c>
<c>Admin Name</c>
<c>Admin Name</c>
<c>60</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Admin Email</c>
<c>Admin Email</c>
<c>54</c>
<c>12</c>
<c>Admin ID</c>
<c>Admin ID</c>
<c>52</c>
<c>16</c>
<c>Admin Fax</c>
<c>Admin Fax</c>
<c>44</c>
<c>8</c>
<c>Admin Phone</c>
<c>Admin Phone</c>
<c>43</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Admin Organization</c>
<c>Admin Organization</c>
<c>42</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Admin Country Code</c>
<c>Country</c>
<c>42</c>
<c>7</c>
<c>Admin City</c>
<c>Admin City</c>
<c>35</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>Admin Postal Code</c>
<c>Admin Postal Code</c>
<c>35</c>
<c>7</c>
<c>Admin State/Province</c>
<c>Admin State/Province</c>
<c>28</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>Admin Country</c>
<c>Admin Country</c>
<c>17</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>Admin Phone Ext.</c>
<c>Admin Phone Ext.</c>
<c>17</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>Admin Fax Ext.</c>
<c>Admin Fax Ext.</c>
<c>17</c>
<c>3</c>
</texttable>
<t>
Among all the data elements, "Admin Street", "Admin Name" and "Admin Email" are the top 3 data elements.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Tech Contact">
<t>
The following table shows all the information about domain name technical contact. 14 data elements are listed below.
</t>
<texttable title="Tech Contact">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>Most Popular Label</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of Labels</ttcol>
<c>Tech Email</c>
<c>Tech Email</c>
<c>59</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Tech ID</c>
<c>Tech ID</c>
<c>55</c>
<c>16</c>
<c>Tech Name</c>
<c>Tech Name</c>
<c>47</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>Tech Fax</c>
<c>Tech Fax</c>
<c>45</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Tech Phone</c>
<c>Tech Phone</c>
<c>45</c>
<c>10</c>
<c>Tech Country Code</c>
<c>Country</c>
<c>43</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Tech Organization</c>
<c>Tech Organization</c>
<c>39</c>
<c>7</c>
<c>Tech City</c>
<c>Tech City</c>
<c>36</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Tech Postal Code</c>
<c>Tech Postal Code</c>
<c>36</c>
<c>7</c>
<c>Tech State/Province</c>
<c>Tech State/Province</c>
<c>30</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Tech Street</c>
<c>Tech Street1</c>
<c>27</c>
<c>16</c>
<c>Tech Country</c>
<c>Tech Country</c>
<c>18</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>Tech Fax Ext</c>
<c>Tech Fax Ext</c>
<c>18</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>Tech Phone Ext.</c>
<c>Tech Phone Ext.</c>
<c>13</c>
<c>3</c>
</texttable>
<t>
Among all the data elements, "Tech Email", "Tech ID" and "Tech Name" are the top 3 data elements.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Billing Contact">
<t>
The following table shows all the information about domain name billing contact. 14 data elements are listed below.
</t>
<texttable title="Billing Contact">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>Most Popular Label</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of Labels</ttcol>
<c>Billing Name</c>
<c>Name</c>
<c>47</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>Billing Fax</c>
<c>Fax</c>
<c>43</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>Billing Email</c>
<c>Email Address</c>
<c>42</c>
<c>7</c>
<c>Billing Country Code</c>
<c>Country</c>
<c>38</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Billing Phone</c>
<c>Phone Number</c>
<c>34</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>Billing ID</c>
<c>Billing ID</c>
<c>28</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Billing City</c>
<c>Billing City</c>
<c>28</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Billing Organization</c>
<c>Billing Organization</c>
<c>28</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>Billing Postal Code</c>
<c>Billing Postal Code</c>
<c>27</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Billing State/Province</c>
<c>Billing State/Province</c>
<c>21</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>Billing Street</c>
<c>Billing Street1</c>
<c>19</c>
<c>13</c>
<c>Billing Country</c>
<c>Billing Country</c>
<c>13</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>Billing Phone Ext.</c>
<c>Billing Phone Ext.</c>
<c>10</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>Billing Fax Ext</c>
<c>Billing Fax Ext</c>
<c>10</c>
<c>2</c>
</texttable>
<t>
Among all the data elements, "Billing Name", "Tech Fax" and "Billing Email" are the top 3 data elements.
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="WHOIS Data of Nameserver">
<t>
114 registries (about 92% of all the 124 registries) have the nameserver data element in their WHOIS response. But
there are 63 different labels for this element. Top 3 labels for this element are Name Server which is supported by
25% of all the registries, Name Servers which is supported by 16% of all the registries and nserver which is supported
by 12% of all the registries.
</t>
<texttable title="WHOIS Data of Nameserver">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>Most Popular Label</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of Labels</ttcol>
<c>NameServer</c>
<c>NameServer</c>
<c>114</c>
<c>63</c>
</texttable>
<t>
Some registries have nameserver elements such like "nameserver 1", "nameserver 2" till "nameserver n". So there are more
labels than of other data elements.
</t>
</section>
<section title="WHOIS Data of Registrar">
<t>
There are three data elements about registrar information.
</t>
<texttable title="WHOIS Data of Registrar">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>Most Popular Label</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of Labels</ttcol>
<c>Sponsoring Registrar</c>
<c>Registrar</c>
<c>84</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>Created by Registrar</c>
<c>Created by</c>
<c>14</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>Updated by Registrar</c>
<c>Last Updated by Registrar</c>
<c>11</c>
<c>3</c>
</texttable>
<t>
67.7% of the registries have sponsoring registrar data element. Elements such as "Created by Registrar" and "Updated by Registrar"
are supported by 11.3% and 8.9% of the registries.
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="Other Objects">
<t>
So called other objects are those data elements that are self-designed or are difficult to be classified. There are 392 other
objects altogether. The following tables lists the top 50 other objects according to the data collection result.
</t>
<texttable title="Top 50 Other Objects">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<c>Registrant</c>
<c>41</c>
<c>Phone</c>
<c>32</c>
<c>Technical contact</c>
<c>26</c>
<c>Administrative contact</c>
<c>15</c>
<c>source</c>
<c>14</c>
<c>fax-no</c>
<c>13</c>
<c>nic-hdl</c>
<c>13</c>
<c>Billing Contact</c>
<c>12</c>
<c>referral url</c>
<c>11</c>
<c>e-mail</c>
<c>10</c>
<c>WHOIS server</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Admin Contact</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Type</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>Website</c>
<c>9</c>
<c>zone-c</c>
<c>8</c>
<c>remarks</c>
<c>7</c>
<c>Registration URL</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>anonymous</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>anniversary</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>hold</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>nsl-id</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>
obsoleted
</c>
<c>6</c>
<c>
Customer Service Contact
</c>
<c>5</c>
<c>
Customer Service Email
</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>
Registrar ID
</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>
org
</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>
person
</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>
Maintainer
</c>
<c>4</c>
<c>
Nombre
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
Trademark Number
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
Trademark Country
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
descr
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
url
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
Postal address
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
Registrar URL
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
International Name
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
International Address
</c>
<c>3</c>
<c>
Admin Contacts
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Contractual Language
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Date Trademark Registered
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Date Trademark Applied For
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
IP Address
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Keys
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Language
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
NIC handle
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Record maintained by
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Registration Service Provider
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Registration Service Provided By
</c>
<c>2</c>
<c>
Registrar URL (registration services)
</c>
<c>2</c>
</texttable>
<t>
Some elements like "Registrant" are difficult to be classified into any categories. A few registries have two levels of data
elements, for example:
<figure>
<artwork>
<![CDATA[
Registrant:
Name:
Email:
...
]]>
</artwork>
</figure>
We do not think the first level of elements belong to any part. So they are put into the scope of other objects.
</t>
<t>
Some other data elements, like "Remarks", "anniversary" and "Customer service Contact" etc., are designed particularly for their
own purpose by different registries.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Conclusion">
<section title="Preliminary Statistics ">
<t>
Some preliminary statistics conclusion could be drawn from the raw data.
</t>
<t>
<list style="symbols">
<t>
All of the 124 domain registries have the object names in their responses although they are in various formats.
</t>
<t>
Of the 118 whois services contacted, 65 registries show their registrant contact. About half of the registries (60 registries) support admin contact information. There are 47 registries, that
is about one third of the total number, have technical and billing contact information. And only 7 of all
the 124 registries give their abuse email in remarks part. No explicit abuse contact information is provided.
</t>
<t>
There are mainly two presentation formats. One is key:value, the other is data block format.
Example of key-value format:
<figure>
<artwork>
<![CDATA[
Domain Information
Query: na-nic.com.na
Status: Delegated
Created: 17 Apr 2004
Modified: 14 Nov 2010
Expires: 31 Dec 9999
Name Servers: oshikoko.omadhina.net
ns1.na.afrisp.net
ns2.na.afrisp.net
...
]]>
</artwork>
</figure>
Example of data block format:
<figure>
<artwork>
<![CDATA[
Whois database
domain nic.vg
Domain Name nic.vg
Registered 1998-09-02
Expiry 2012-09-02
Resource Records
a 195.153.6.27
mx 10 terpsichore.william.org
www a 195.153.6.27
Contact details
Registrant,
Technical Contact,
Billing Contact,
Admin. Contact AdamsNames Reserved Domains (i)
These domains are not available for registration
United Kingdom
Identifier: neams048s
Servidor Whois de NIC-Venezuela (.VE)
Este servidor contiene informacion autoritativa exclusivamente
de dominios .VE Cualquier consulta sobre este servicio, puede
hacerla al correo electronico whois@nic.ve
Titular:
Jhonny Valera (nic.ve-dom) jhovalera@conatel.gob.ve
Comision Nacional de Telecomunicaciones
Av. Veracruz con calle Cali, Edif Aguila, Urb. Las Mercedes
Caracas, Distrito Capital VE
0212-9090493 (FAX) +582127718599
]]>
</artwork>
</figure>
</t>
<t>
11 registries give local script responses. The WHOIS information of other registries are all represented in English.
</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
<section title="Data Elements Analysis">
<t>
Top 10 data elements are as follows:
</t>
<texttable title="Top 10 Data Elements">
<ttcol align='center'>Data Element</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of TLDs</ttcol>
<c>Domain Name</c>
<c>118</c>
<c>Name Server</c>
<c>114</c>
<c>Creation Date</c>
<c>106</c>
<c>Domain Status</c>
<c>95</c>
<c>Sponsoring Registrar</c>
<c>84</c>
<c>Expiration Date</c>
<c>81</c>
<c>Updated Date</c>
<c>70</c>
<c>Registrant Name</c>
<c>65</c>
<c>Admin Street</c>
<c>64</c>
<c>Admin Name</c>
<c>60</c>
</texttable>
<t>
Most of the domain related WHOIS information is included in the top 10 data elements. Other information like name server and
registrar name are also supported by most registries.
</t>
<t>
We did a cumulative distribution analysis of all the data elements.
</t>
<t>
<list style="format (%d)">
<t>
About 5% of data elements are supported by over 111 (90%) registries.
</t>
<t>
About 30% of data elements are supported by over 44 (35%) registries.
</t>
<t>
About 60% of data elements are supported by over 32 (26%) registries.
</t>
<t>
About 90% of data elements are supported by over 14 (11%) registries.
</t>
</list>
</t>
<t>
From the above result, we can conclude that only a few registries support all the public objects, most of the registries
support just parts of all the objects.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Labels Analysis">
<t>
The top 10 labels of different data elements include:
</t>
<texttable title="Top 10 Labels">
<ttcol align='center'>Labels</ttcol>
<ttcol align='center'>No. of Labels</ttcol>
<c>Name Server</c>
<c>63</c>
<c>Creation Date</c>
<c>24</c>
<c>Expiration Date</c>
<c>21</c>
<c>Updated Date</c>
<c>20</c>
<c>Admin Street</c>
<c>19</c>
<c>Tech ID</c>
<c>18</c>
<c>Registrant Street</c>
<c>16</c>
<c>Admin ID</c>
<c>16</c>
<c>Tech Street</c>
<c>16</c>
<c>Billing Street</c>
<c>13</c>
</texttable>
<t>
As explained above, name server label is a unique example that many registries define the name server elements from "nameserver 1" till
"nameserver n". So label numbers of name server are much more than other elements. Other elements about date, street name have more
labels.
</t>
<t>
A cumulative distribution analysis of label numbers was done. About 90% of data elements have more than 2 Labels. So it is very necessary
to specify a standard and unified format for object names of WHOIS response.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Other Objects Analysis">
<t>
According to statistics result, there are 392 other data objects in total that are not easy to be classified or privately owned by various
registries. Top 50 other objects are listed in the table in section 4.3. You can find that various different objects are designed for
some particular purpose. So in order to ensure uniqueness of JSON names used in the Restful Whois service, establishing an IANA registry is a
necessary requirement.
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="Limitation">
<t>
<list style="symbols">
<t>
The input "nic.ccTLD" maybe is not a good choice.
</t>
<t>
The classification of local script data elements may not be accurate. 11 registries give local script responses.
</t>
<t>
The extension data elements are used randomly by different registries. It is difficult to do statistical analysis.
</t>
<t>
Sample sizes of contact, name server and registrar queries are small.
<list style="symbols">
<t>
We only use "Whois contactID/nameserver/registrar" as the query commands to check.
</t>
<t>
Some registries may not support contact, name server or registrar queries.
</t>
<t>
Some may not support query contact by ID.
</t>
<t>
Contact information of some registries may be protected.
</t>
</list>
</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
</section>
<section title="IANA Considerations" anchor="Iana">
<t>
This document does not specify any IANA actions.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Security considerations" anchor="security">
<t>
This document does not provide any other security services or introduce any additional considerations.
</t>
</section>
<section title="Acknowledgements" anchor="Acknowledgements">
<t>
This document has been reviewed and improved by the design team. The authors especially thank the following
individuals who gave their suggestions and contributions to this document: Guangqing Deng, Frederico A C Neves and Ray Bellis.
</t>
</section>
</middle>
<back>
<references title="Normative References">
&RFC2119;
&RFC2622;
&RFC3912;
&RFC5730;
&RFC5731;
&RFC5732;
&RFC5733;
&RFC5890;
&I-D.ietf-weirds-json-response;
<reference anchor="Stat-Data-File"
target="https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B96TtoK8a--MTTRuVUt3UHZMdEk">
<front>
<title>
WHOIS Statistics Data File
</title>
<author initials="N" surname="Kong">
<organization>CNNIC</organization>
</author>
<author initials="L" surname="Zhou">
<organization>CNNIC</organization>
</author>
<author initials="G" surname="Deng">
<organization>CNNIC</organization>
</author>
<date month="July" year="2012" />
</front>
</reference>
</references>
<section title="Change Log">
<t>
<list style="hanging">
<t hangText="Initial -00:">Adopted as working group document.</t>
<t hangText="-01:">
<list style="symbols">
<t>
Added Change Log section.
</t>
<t>
Added RIR data objects.
</t>
<t>
Exchanged section 2 and section 3.
</t>
</list>
</t>
</list>
</t>
</section>
</back>
</rfc>
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 01:07:18 |